Literature DB >> 8118734

The case for using objective scoring systems to predict intensive care unit outcome.

C M Watts1, W A Knaus.   

Abstract

The acceptance and more widespread use of objective probability estimates will depend on addressing several practical issues. Physicians generally are unfamiliar with these estimates, their origin, and how they should be used. Physicians need to understand the conceptual origins of prognostic systems, their strengths and limitations, and their usefulness in helping to resolve uncertainty and improve critical decision making. Better communication and understanding of patient and family preferences and values will be necessary to ensure that the use of numerical predictions will not be the dominant or exclusive consideration. No matter how refined and elaborate these systems become, they represent simplification of even more complex biologic decision-making systems. The predictions must be interpreted carefully and used by trained intensivists, with the constant opportunity to exercise human discretion. The challenge to the developers of these systems will be to improve their accuracy, refine their use with specific disease entities that are important in determining outcome in critical care (e.g. multi-organ system failure, sepsis, adult respiratory distress syndrome), improve display of data and ease of data capture with automated systems, and construct data-bases and predictive equations that are fluid, constantly growing, and adjusting to capture developments in medical care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8118734

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Clin        ISSN: 0749-0704            Impact factor:   3.598


  6 in total

1.  Decision support in multi-professional communication.

Authors:  Scott Weber; Karen L Courtney; Mary Benham-Hutchins
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  Objective, Structured Proforma to Score the Merit of Scientific Presentations.

Authors:  Nayan Agarwal; Rajat Thawani; Setu Gupta; Arun Sharma; Upreet Dhaliwal
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2014-05-26       Impact factor: 0.656

3.  [Value of the Hannover Intensive Score (HIS) in internal medicine intensive care].

Authors:  A von Bierbrauer; C Burchardt; H H Müller; P von Wichert
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  1998-09-15

4.  Adaptation of Predictive Models to PDA Hand-Held Devices.

Authors:  Edward J Lin; Thomas B Purcell; Rick A McPheeters
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2008-01

Review 5.  Trends from the United States with end of life decisions in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  D Teres
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 6.  Bench-to-bedside review: outcome predictions for critically ill patients in the emergency department.

Authors:  Jenny Hargrove; H Bryant Nguyen
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2005-04-18       Impact factor: 9.097

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.